Idoit40fans wrote:His mediocrity justified all the questioning of the decision to give him the net and give it to him so early. Did anyone in junior hockey agree with it? 3 of the four goals today were saveable, 1 should have definitely been saved.

1st goal, screened by not 1, not 2, not 3, but 4....FOUR of his own guys. 2nd goal, screened by 2 of his own guys. 3rd goal was nasty. A curl and drag into the middle with a US guy busting the net and a perfectly placed shot. 4th goal was probably the weakest goal, and his D just let Vesey walk around him. Were they savable? Maybe, but to expect your goalie to make those saves, you should be prepared to lose.

I you are good enough to be given the job that early, youre good enough to stop goals 2 and 3. The 4th was bad.

Idoit40fans wrote:His mediocrity justified all the questioning of the decision to give him the net and give it to him so early. Did anyone in junior hockey agree with it? 3 of the four goals today were saveable, 1 should have definitely been saved.

1st goal, screened by not 1, not 2, not 3, but 4....FOUR of his own guys. 2nd goal, screened by 2 of his own guys. 3rd goal was nasty. A curl and drag into the middle with a US guy busting the net and a perfectly placed shot. 4th goal was probably the weakest goal, and his D just let Vesey walk around him. Were they savable? Maybe, but to expect your goalie to make those saves, you should be prepared to lose.

I you are good enough to be given the job that early, youre good enough to stop goals 2 and 3. The 4th was bad.

Idoit40fans wrote:His mediocrity justified all the questioning of the decision to give him the net and give it to him so early. Did anyone in junior hockey agree with it? 3 of the four goals today were saveable, 1 should have definitely been saved.

1st goal, screened by not 1, not 2, not 3, but 4....FOUR of his own guys. 2nd goal, screened by 2 of his own guys. 3rd goal was nasty. A curl and drag into the middle with a US guy busting the net and a perfectly placed shot. 4th goal was probably the weakest goal, and his D just let Vesey walk around him. Were they savable? Maybe, but to expect your goalie to make those saves, you should be prepared to lose.

I you are good enough to be given the job that early, youre good enough to stop goals 2 and 3. The 4th was bad.

That makes zero sense, but whatever.

Makes perfect sense. People were confused by him being giventhe job because he was nothing special relative to the other contenders. He showed that to be true. Very simple.

Idoit40fans wrote:His mediocrity justified all the questioning of the decision to give him the net and give it to him so early. Did anyone in junior hockey agree with it? 3 of the four goals today were saveable, 1 should have definitely been saved.

1st goal, screened by not 1, not 2, not 3, but 4....FOUR of his own guys. 2nd goal, screened by 2 of his own guys. 3rd goal was nasty. A curl and drag into the middle with a US guy busting the net and a perfectly placed shot. 4th goal was probably the weakest goal, and his D just let Vesey walk around him. Were they savable? Maybe, but to expect your goalie to make those saves, you should be prepared to lose.

I you are good enough to be given the job that early, youre good enough to stop goals 2 and 3. The 4th was bad.

That makes zero sense, but whatever.

Makes perfect sense. People were confused by him being giventhe job because he was nothing special relative to the other contenders. He gave no one reason to think otherwise. Very simple.

Idoit40fans wrote:His mediocrity justified all the questioning of the decision to give him the net and give it to him so early. Did anyone in junior hockey agree with it? 3 of the four goals today were saveable, 1 should have definitely been saved.

1st goal, screened by not 1, not 2, not 3, but 4....FOUR of his own guys. 2nd goal, screened by 2 of his own guys. 3rd goal was nasty. A curl and drag into the middle with a US guy busting the net and a perfectly placed shot. 4th goal was probably the weakest goal, and his D just let Vesey walk around him. Were they savable? Maybe, but to expect your goalie to make those saves, you should be prepared to lose.

I you are good enough to be given the job that early, youre good enough to stop goals 2 and 3. The 4th was bad.

That makes zero sense, but whatever.

Makes perfect sense. People were confused by him being giventhe job because he was nothing special relative to the other contenders. He showed that to be true. Very simple.

You're blaming the kid for giving up some goals, when his team obviously hung him out to dry, because the organization he plays for was stupid for giving him the starting job too early? How is that his fault? And if you think Binnington would have made some of those saves, you are kidding yourself.

I kind of thought Subban might struggle a tiny bit in this tournament because of how raw he is...major upside, but so many holes in his game that the elite players are more apt to find that in a closed coursed like this. You can scout every game basically, get a read on him and make him dance. He looked a bit shaky early on, picked it up a bit and then had a let down here against the Americans. His fault or not, it was a shaky tournament for him. Jordan Binnington is the smoother goalie and probably would have fared a couple goals better, in my opinion.

Gibson has been by far the best goalie of the tournament and I'm not sure how close it really is. Such a far cry from how this goalie looked against the Finns in 2012 tournament. A 4-1 loss, IIRC, but it was sloppier than that. I had serious reservations about him after the tournament, but his play this year in the Ontario League and this performance here - win or lose against the Swedes - has earned him the Tournament All-Star Team, in my opinion. He's been just lights out.

Gaudreau is actually from down my way when I used to live in South Jersey. His dad owns the rink I believe that I've played at a bit (Hollydell) and he's just winning where ever he goes. He's a kid that has too much compete level not to succeed at the next level, the only thing that'll hold him back is that he belongs to a sinking ship of a team that doesn't figure to do anything remotely competent in the next 5 years at least...they'll probably trade him for a 3rd and call it a win...

The Swedes are missing some parts, especially on the blueline. That makes them a little vulnerable to the Americans forecheck I think...their goaltending has been fine, but not outstanding. I'm assuming that Lundstrom gets the nod, he's got the big equipment, chest protector to the ears type of kid and he's just a blocker...the scouting report seems to be either getting moving or just go five hole before his pads take the area away...I can't imagine they'd go with a subpar goaltender like Lassinatti in such a big spot, I think he's quite dreadful actually...

Finally some of the depth players that I've enjoyed watching toil away on Sweden's lower lines are getting a chance to show their stuff a little higher in the lineup. They might catch lightning in a bottle, but the USA's goaltending should provide enough of a cushion to give them the Gold, but you never know what can happen in these short order tournaments...

meow wrote:You're blaming the kid for giving up some goals, when his team obviously hung him out to dry, because the organization he plays for was stupid for giving him the starting job too early? How is that his fault? And if you think Binnington would have made some of those saves, you are kidding yourself.

Who is blaming him and who is saying its his fault? Someone commented on the venom towards him and i explained where it came from. Hes a good prospect with holes in his game. Im not condemning his career. Get over yourself.

meow wrote:You're blaming the kid for giving up some goals, when his team obviously hung him out to dry, because the organization he plays for was stupid for giving him the starting job too early? How is that his fault? And if you think Binnington would have made some of those saves, you are kidding yourself.

Who is blaming him and who is saying its his fault? Someone commented on the venom towards him and i explained where it came from. Hes a good prospect with holes in his game. Im not condemning his career. Get over yourself.

He's been just about Canada's best defenseman so far. Taking the body more than usual, playing a good shutdown role for them - recently with Dougie Hamilton, the behemoth from Boston. They take on the other team's top lines generally and have been rather successful. In fact, Hamilton has been a touch underwhelming, as many believed he'd be tearing up the competition here given that he appeared to be NHL-ready based on his play in the OHL, but it just wasn't there this tournament. He didn't play bad, but I expected more. Same with another NHL-ready player in Nail Yakupov, who was all flash and no substance in this tournament. For reference, I felt the same feelings about Mikael Granlund last year for the Finns. I think maybe my eyes were bigger than my stomach in terms of watching a should-be-NHL-ready player playing against the best of his age group and I became a bit disappointed. Last point, I think RNH was a relative lock coming into today for the tournament's all-star team on merit. I think the Bronze Medal game will be important for some voters.

But yes, Harrington was probably the best Pens prospect in the tourney. Olli Maatta and the Finns were an optical illusion it seems. Having seen them in pre-tournament play, I thought they'd challenge hard for a medal and instead they were in the relegation pool. Maatta wasn't overly helpful in the cause. He seemed like he was going to be a transition machine in the pre-tourney game...and then the wheels kind of came off for everyone...Maatta was decent defensively, but wasn't able to connect with his forwards effectively later on it seemed. The Finnish team looks poorly coached, they are not very cohesive or motivated when it matters most.

Bluegers was an offensive catalyst for Latvia, a team that struggled mightily to get off the ground in this tournament. He turned and zipped one of the shoulder of the blocking goaltender from Sweden Lundstrom for Latvia's only goal against the Swedes in a game that was kept interesting until the later stages. He'll try to keep the Latvians in the top pool of the tournament in a few hours against the Germans. The Latvias have 0 points to Germany's 1 in relegation group play, so you can figure out what's at stake there. The Finns have avoided relegation safely and easily (13:1) and will play the otherwise safe Slovaks for no reason at all later in the morning...

Of course I'm not as draft savvy as the intellectual elite on this message board, but after spending first and second round picks on Despres, Samuelson, Morrow, Harrington and acquiring Doumlin I simply wouldve liked to seen a top tier forward taken instead of Pouliot. Of course we got Maatta later in the first but there was no guarantee he would be there. As far as Forsberg not doing well in the World Juniors this year, in my mind, he was the best player on the ice today. Does that mean he's going to be Jesus on ice at the NHL level? Of course not. But with all the high picks we have log jammed on defense, and pulling my hair out watching WBS trying to score goals, I simply would've liked to see what Forsberg could do with us.

You don't pick a forward just for the sake of it -- it's unfortunate that the one time the Pens have a Top-10 pick is one of the worst drafts for forwards in recent memory. If they had picked up the #8 pick in this year's draft, well.... that'd be much more exciting.

meecrofilm wrote:You don't pick a forward just for the sake of it -- it's unfortunate that the one time the Pens have a Top-10 pick is one of the worst drafts for forwards in recent memory. If they had picked up the #8 pick in this year's draft, well.... that'd be much more exciting.

I agree, you don't pick a forward just for the sake of picking a forward. But I truly believe the kid has some serious talent. On the flip side, do you think Pouliot was a reach at 8?

meecrofilm wrote:You don't pick a forward just for the sake of it -- it's unfortunate that the one time the Pens have a Top-10 pick is one of the worst drafts for forwards in recent memory. If they had picked up the #8 pick in this year's draft, well.... that'd be much more exciting.

I agree, you don't pick a forward just for the sake of picking a forward. But I truly believe the kid has some serious talent. On the flip side, do you think Pouliot was a reach at 8?

The one player then and now I would've taken ahead of him was Jacob Trouba. But I don't want to turn this into another Pouliot draft thread, there's been enough of those already.